It now appears my post(s) on the first page have been turned into pete posts and deleted from this thread. That's classy...

Al Gore ordered it stricken from the records.

__________________
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father ... And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

"If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson

The username shows pete, but they were my posts. I even got rep for one of the posts, which now just shows N/A in the rep column where the link should be. Posts were changed to pete's name, then deleted.

The username shows pete, but they were my posts. I even got rep for one of the posts, which now just shows N/A in the rep column where the link should be. Posts were changed to pete's name, then deleted.

I remember the graphs. That's ****ed up. I'd like to know the answer too. That aint right without an explanation.

Economic impacts will come regardless of anyone's economic or energy policy. It is a matter of physics, biology, and economics.

Anthropogenic climate change is happening.
Future weather patterns will be different, which will affect water availability, in many places negatively.

Food systems are dependent upon water availability. Food in many places will be harder to grow.

Food shortages will cause food prices to go up.

None of this has a damn thing to do with who sits in the office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

History says you are wrong. If you were right the Roman Warm Period and Medieval Maximum would see mass starvation, desertification, and economic chaos. Instead we saw population growth, an expansion of wealth across a large geographic area, urbanization and specialization. Warm periods saw the silk road that connected the Mediterranean Sea with China. It saw the Arabian spice trade that connected Indonesia with the Middle East, and the African salt and gold trade coming up from Zimbabwe and Mali/Songhai.

If your theory was right then the colder times would be the times of economic boom. Instead we saw deurbanization, famine, economic contraction, contraction in arts and specialization, and massive population decline. The only reason that the little ice age didn't have similar effects is that mechanization that started in the high middle ages and new strains of wheat developed in the low middle ages allowed for greater food production with a lower population. Just look at the population trends after the Black Death, the population recovered slower then normal after a pandemic because it was the start of the little ice age.

History says you are wrong. If you were right the Roman Warm Period and Medieval Maximum would see mass starvation, desertification, and economic chaos. Instead we saw population growth, an expansion of wealth across a large geographic area, urbanization and specialization. Warm periods saw the silk road that connected the Mediterranean Sea with China. It saw the Arabian spice trade that connected Indonesia with the Middle East, and the African salt and gold trade coming up from Zimbabwe and Mali/Songhai.

If your theory was right then the colder times would be the times of economic boom. Instead we saw deurbanization, famine, economic contraction, contraction in arts and specialization, and massive population decline. The only reason that the little ice age didn't have similar effects is that mechanization that started in the high middle ages and new strains of wheat developed in the low middle ages allowed for greater food production with a lower population. Just look at the population trends after the Black Death, the population recovered slower then normal after a pandemic because it was the start of the little ice age.

Malthus was wrong and his followers continue to be wrong.

Yup.

__________________
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father ... And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

"If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson

__________________
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father ... And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

"If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson

History says you are wrong. If you were right the Roman Warm Period and Medieval Maximum would see mass starvation, desertification, and economic chaos. Instead we saw population growth, an expansion of wealth across a large geographic area, urbanization and specialization. Warm periods saw the silk road that connected the Mediterranean Sea with China. It saw the Arabian spice trade that connected Indonesia with the Middle East, and the African salt and gold trade coming up from Zimbabwe and Mali/Songhai.

If your theory was right then the colder times would be the times of economic boom. Instead we saw deurbanization, famine, economic contraction, contraction in arts and specialization, and massive population decline. The only reason that the little ice age didn't have similar effects is that mechanization that started in the high middle ages and new strains of wheat developed in the low middle ages allowed for greater food production with a lower population. Just look at the population trends after the Black Death, the population recovered slower then normal after a pandemic because it was the start of the little ice age.

Malthus was wrong and his followers continue to be wrong.

That's not correct. The Medieval Warm Period was quite different than what we're experiencing now. I realize that it's a popular topic brought up by climate change deniers. But it's been proven wrong. Globally, the Medieval Warming Period was still quite a bit cooler than what we're seeing now. Not to mention the vast population differences, agricultural methods, and dependence on local food sources.

Quote:

Prior temperature reconstructions tend to focus on the global average (or sometimes hemispheric average). To answer the question of the Medieval Warm Period, more than 1,000 tree-ring, ice core, coral, sediment and other assorted proxy records spanning both hemispheres were used to construct a global map of temperature change over the past 1,500 years (Mann 2009). The Medieval Warm Period saw warm conditions over a large part of the North Atlantic, Southern Greenland, the Eurasian Arctic, and parts of North America. In these regions, temperature appears to be warmer than the 1961–1990 baseline. In some areas, temperatures were even as warm as today. However, certain regions such as central Eurasia, northwestern North America, and the tropical Pacific are substantially cooler compared to the 1961 to 1990 average.

How does the Medieval Warm Period compare to current conditions? Here is the temperature pattern for the last decade (1999 to 2008). What we see is widespread warming (with a few exceptions such as regional East Antarctic cooling)

The Medieval Warm Period was not a global phenomenon. Warmer conditions were concentrated in certain regions. Some regions were even colder than during the Little Ice Age. To claim the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today is to narrowly focus on a few regions that showed unusual warmth. However, when we look at the broader picture, we see that the Medieval Warm Period was a regional phenomenon with other regions showing strong cooling. What is more, and as can be seen in Figure 4, globally, temperatures during the Medieval Period were less than today.

The username shows pete, but they were my posts. I even got rep for one of the posts, which now just shows N/A in the rep column where the link should be. Posts were changed to pete's name, then deleted.

The username shows pete, but they were my posts. I even got rep for one of the posts, which now just shows N/A in the rep column where the link should be. Posts were changed to pete's name, then deleted.

ok even weirder... the posts by PETE were real posts he posted in the wrong thread (I remember seeing those at the time)... you post was somewhere earlier (before my post in response to cdcox) I'm pretty sure your post was even earlier than that.

I'll keep digging, nothing I can see why they would go way.. and they are GONE gone.. not even a trace that I can see as admin yet.